Macroseismic and seismotectonic analysis of the Mw 6.1 August 17, 2023 earthquake in the central region of Colombia
Análisis macrosísmico y sismotectónico del terremoto de magnitud Mw 6.1 ocurrido el 17 de agosto de 2023 en la región central de Colombia
Elkin de J. Salcedo-Hurtado1, *
, Augusto Antonio Gómez-Capera2, Carlos A. Vargas-Jiménez3, Germán Chicangana-Montón3,4, Héctor Mora-Páez5, Juan Miguel Velásquez6
1 Department of Geography, Universidad del Valle. Calle 100 #13-00, Comuna 17, Valle del Cauca, 760032, Cali, Colombia.
2 Sezione di Milano, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia. Via Alfonso Corti 12, 20133, Milano, Italy.
3 Grupo Geofísica, Departamento de Geociencias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá.
4 Grupo Geoamenazas e Ingeniería Civil, Facultad de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad Santo Tomás, Villavicencio.
5 Facultad de Ciencias e Ingeniería, Universidad de Manizales. Cra. 9a #19-03, 170001 , Manizales, Caldas, Colombia.
6 Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad del Valle. Calle 100 #13-00, Comuna 17, Valle del Cauca, 760032, Cali, Colombia.
* Corresponding author: (E. J. Salcedo-Hurtado) This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
How to cite this article:
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. J., Gómez-Capera, A. A., Vargas-Jiménez, C. A., Chicangana-Montón, G., Mora-Páez, H., & Velásquez, J. M. (2026). Macroseismic and seismotectonic analysis of the Mw 6.1 August 17, 2023 earthquake in the central region of Colombia. Boletín de la Sociedad Geológica Mexicana, 78(2), A281025. https://doi.org/10.18268/BSGM2026v78n2A281025
Manuscript received: August 1, 2025. Corrected manuscript received: October 14, 2025. Manuscript accepted: October 25, 2025.
ABSTRACT
This study conducts a complementary analysis of instrumental and macroseismic data regarding the August 17, 2023, earthquake in the central region of Colombia. This event is part of a historical earthquake sequence in the region, with an intensity higher than VII EMS-98, which has caused considerable material damage in the area. This earthquake had a magnitude of 6.1 Mw. The application of the attenuation model calibrated in magnitude Mw and the BW97 method allows for precise modeling of the location and magnitude from macroseismic data within an acceptable margin of uncertainty for both magnitudes (Mw±0.2) and location (±13 km). Using valid empirical regressions, we determine the parameters of the seismic focus size: horizontal extension L = 9.62 km, vertical extension lz = 15.76 km, rupture area A = 97.3 km2 , and deformed volume V = 1533.45 km3 . Within the first five days, at least 90 aftershocks were located by the Red Sismológica Nacional de Colombia (RSNC), supporting the source-area geometry inferred in this study. With these parameters and applying Kostrov’s model to the seismic flow of the rock mass, it was found that the maximum compressional strain rate is ε̇yy=1.22 x 10-6 yr-1, which is produced at an average velocity of 11.7 mm/ yr in the E-W direction.
Keywords: earthquake, aftershocks, focal mechanism, seismotectonic deformation, focus extension, Colombia.
RESUMEN
Este estudio realiza un análisis complementario de los datos instrumentales y macrosísmicos relativos al terremoto del 17 de agosto de 2023 ocurrido en la región central de Colombia. Este evento forma parte de una secuencia sísmica histórica en la región, con intensidad superior a VII EMS-98, que ha causado cuantiosos daños materiales en la zona. Este terremoto tuvo una magnitud de 6.1 Mw. La aplicación del modelo de atenuación calibrado en magnitud Mw y del método BW97 permite modelar con precisión la localización y la magnitud a partir de datos macrosísmicos, dentro de un margen de incertidumbre aceptable tanto para las magnitudes (Mw±0.2) como para la localización (±13 km). Utilizando regresiones empíricas válidas, determinamos los parámetros del tamaño del foco sísmico: extensión horizontal L = 9.62 km, extensión vertical lz = 15.76 km, área de ruptura A = 97.3 km2 y volumen deformado V = 1533.45 km3 . En los primeros cinco días, la Red Sismológica Nacional de Colombia (RSNC) localizó al menos 90 réplicas, lo que corrobora la geometría del área fuente inferida en este estudio. Con estos parámetros y aplicando el modelo de Kostrov sobre el flujo sísmico del macizo rocoso, se comprobó que la máxima velocidad de deformación compresional es ε̇yy =1.22 x 10-6 a-1, que se produce a una velocidad media de 11.7 mm a-1, en dirección E-O.
Palabras clave: terremoto, réplicas, mecanismo focal, deformación sismotectónica, extensión del foco, Colombia.
1. Introduction
Tectonically, Colombia’s territory is influenced by the interaction of the Nazca, Caribbean, and South American plates, with the triple junction occurring in the northwestern corner of the South American continent (Pennington, 1981; Velandia et al., 2005; Vargas and Mann, 2013) and several geological blocks wedged in between the mentioned plates. The Cocos Plate’s action also impacts Colombia’s tectonics (Figure 1). According to published constraints, the Northern Andean Block migrates 60° NE at 8.6 mm/yr with respect to South America, decomposed into 8.1 mm/yr along-margin 35° and 4.3 mm/yr cross-margin 125° components (Mora-Páez et al., 2019). The interaction among these plates and geological blocks establishes a specific regime of tectonic stresses in the region, resulting in tectonic complexity characterized by various processes such as subduction, active volcanism, seismic zones, mountain chains, mineralization zones, and several active faults (Vargas and Duran, 2005; Salazar and Vargas, 2015).
Regional stress regimes, controlled by the movement of tectonic plates, lead to significant deformation processes, which are evident in numerous fault systems and active faults. These geological features create seismically active zones historically responsible for strong earthquakes, causing substantial material and human losses that impact Colombia’s internal regions socially and economically (Vargas et al., 2005).
One such earthquake-prone area in Colombia is the central region, encompassing the departments of Cundinamarca, Boyacá, Tolima, Meta, and Casanare (Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 1997). This region has experienced powerful seismic events resulting in significant damage and losses in various municipalities (Espinosa, 2004; INGEOMINAS, 2008; Sarabia and Cifuentes, 2009; Mora-Páez et al., 2015). Figure 2 depicts the seismic history of Colombia’s central region.
Regarding macroseismic intensity, the most representative historical seismic events in the area of interest occurred on October 18, 1743, July 12, 1785, August 31, 1917, and May 24, 2008. Three of these events have been analyzed using macroseismic methods, leading to a re-evaluation of their intensity, location, and even the calculation of equivalent moment magnitude (Mw): the October 18, 1743 earthquake (Espinosa, 2004; Sarabia and Cifuentes, 2007; Salcedo-Hurtado and Gómez-Capera, 2013), the July 12, 1785 earthquake (Espinosa, 2004; Salcedo-Hurtado and Castaño-Castaño, 2011; Gómez-Capera et al., 2014), and more recently, the May 24, 2008 earthquake (Mora-Páez et al., 2015; Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 2021c).
The complementary study of macroseismic and instrumental data is likely the appropriate way to enhance knowledge about historical earthquakes or recent instrumentally recorded ones, as demonstrated by the analysis of the May 24, 2008 earthquake (Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 2021a), as well as precisely determining the kinematic and dynamic parameters of the seismic focus (Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 2021b; Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 2023).
Studying this seismic event is important for several reasons. Firstly, its record indicates, in this region, a temporal interval between historical earthquakes with macroseismic intensity greater than VI, allowing for the pre-establishment of a possible periodicity or “quasi-return period” of such events, a matter of interest for planning processes and decision-making regarding the economic and social development of the region. Its temporal record affects the seismic regime, especially in the Richter-Gutenberg type frequency law, and helps adjust local and regional seismic hazard and risk studies. Secondly, like the mentioned historical events, this earthquake caused damage and material losses in various populations of the departments of Boyacá, Casanare, Cundinamarca, and Meta, among others, disrupting internal road connectivity in the Eastern Llanos region for several days, one of the most agriculturally and hydrocarbon-productive regions of Colombia, as well as between this region and the capital of the Republic of Colombia.
The objective of this work is to perform a macroseismic and seismotectonic analysis of the earthquake of August 17, 2023 and its implications in the seismic regime of the central region of Colombia. The study is based on the information of the macroseismic intensity points and the focal mechanism reported by the Red Sismológica Nacional de Colombia (RSNC), belonging to the Servicio Geológico Colombiano (SGC). Thus, the study analyzes the macroseismic and instrumental information of the August 17, 2023, earthquake, Mw 6.1, like the historical events, which occurred in the central region of Colombia. The spatial and temporal behavior of the generated aftershocks is considered, allowing for the association of the main event’s genesis with the Servitá fault’s rupture zone. Based on focal mechanism solutions and the seismic moment tensor, parameters of seismotectonic deformation and geometric dimensions of the seismic focus are determined, and the corresponding macroseismic intensity regarding the damages and effects on various populations of the region is interpreted. Finally, the quasi-periodicity indicated by this event within the seismic regime or frequency of occurrence of strong earthquakes in the area is discussed.
1.1. TECTONIC FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY REGION
On August 17, 2023, at 12:04 local time (17:04:51 UTC), an Mw 6.1 earthquake occurred and was felt across much of Colombia. According to the National Seismological Network of Colombia (RSNC - acronym in Spanish), the hypocenter is estimated at coordinates 4.42 °N and 73.63 °W and a depth of 13 km. The epicenter is in the Eastern Cordillera between the departments of Cundinamarca and Meta, near of the Calvario townin the Meta department (Figure 1).
The Eastern Cordillera is a recent tectonic structure undergoing orogenic growth for the past 6 Ma (Mora, 2007). Presently, one of the pieces of evidence confirming crustal deformation and orogenic growth is derived from data collected by continuously operating geodetic stations located in various places in and around the cordillera (Mora-Páez et al., 2016, 2019; Mora-Páez, 2020; Jarrin et al., 2023).
This orogenic growth is attributed to the development of subduction, which the Nazca Plate has undergone since the Miocene beneath the northwestern corner of South America and the southwestern Caribbean Plate (Chicangana and Vargas, 2013). The geometry beneath Colombian territory has been inferred from seismological data (Monsalve, 1998; Vargas and Mann, 2013; Vargas, 2020; Vargas et al., 2020; Lagardere and Vargas, 2021). Mora-Páez et al. (2019) and Mora-Páez (2020) established that the Northern Andean Block (Figure 1) is moving in a N60°E direction at a rate of 8.6 mm/year. Jarrin et al. (2023) estimated the effective geodetic slip rates at block boundaries, finding an estimated displacement of 7 mm/yr for the epicentral zone of the earthquake, consistent with Gómez-Hurtado et al. (2022) estimation in the neotectonics study of the Algeciras Fault.
Various geological faults produce significant seismic activity in the area surrounding the epicenter. According to existing literature and geological mapping in the country (Paris et al., 2000; Mora, 2007; Chicangana et al., 2013; Gómez and Montes, 2020; Vargas, 2020), representative geological faults in this tectonic complex are indicated in Figure 3 and described in Table 1. We report the average strike of the major faults, computed using circular statistics.
2. Data
2.1. MACROSEISMIC INFORMATION
Information regarding the damages and effects caused by the earthquake on August 17, 2023, in Colombian territory was primarily obtained from reports provided by the National Unit for Disaster Risk Management (Unidad Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres [UNGRD]), which is the public entity that directs, guides, and coordinates disaster risk management in Colombia. These reports indicate that Meta, Boyacá, and Cundinamarca were the most affected departments, including Bogotá, where 20 houses were destroyed, 252 houses suffered damage, and nine educational institutions were affected (Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres [UNGRD], 2023). Damage also occurred on the road connecting Bogotá with the city of Villavicencio, leading to the closure of some sections due to material falling, including in two tunnels on this road (Pérez, 2023). The Servicio Geológico Colombiano (SGC, 2023a) evaluated the intensities in various municipalities, reporting intensity values on the EMS-98 scale for 423 municipalities in different departments (intensity data points–IDPs).
Historical reports show earthquakes with macroseismic intensity greater than VI (Table 2), highlighting events such as those on October 18, 1743 (Espinosa, 2004; Sarabia and Cifuentes, 2007; Salcedo-Hurtado and Gómez-Capera, 2013), July 12, 1785 (Espinosa, 2004; Salcedo-Hurtado and Castaño-Castaño, 2011; Gómez-Capera et al., 2014), and May 24, 2008 (Mora-Páez et al., 2015; Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 2021a), which caused damage in various sectors of neighboring populations, including diverse effects on the infrastructure of one of the main roads in the country, connecting the Eastern Llanos Basin with the city of Bogotá, the capital of the republic.
2.2. FOCAL MECHANISM
For the analysis of the aftershocks on the August 17, 2023 (17:04:51 UTC) earthquake in Colombia, the information recorded by the RSNC was used, corresponding to the sequence of events of the first five days after the main earthquake, with magnitudes in the range of 0.5 to 5.6, where three events with significant magnitudes stand out the same day of the main event: the first with a magnitude of 5.6 Mw occurred at 17:17 UTC, the second at 17:18 UTC with a magnitude of 4.8 Mw, and the last one with a magnitude of 5.1 Mw took place at 18:01 UTC (SGC, 2023b).
The information on focal mechanisms used in this work is taken from the RSNC, which prepares a catalog for the most significant events in Colombian territory (Dionicio et al., 2023). This agency evaluates the focal mechanism of each earthquake by applying different methods.
We use the SWIFT approach (source-parameter determination via waveform inversion of Fourier-transformed seismograms) because it aligns with our seismotectonic deformation framework and provides stable centroid/source‐ time estimates under a point‐source, double‑couple assumption. SWIFT inverts frequency-domain seismograms to retrieve the source time function and centroid (Nakano et al., 2008).
Therefore, the RSNC reported fault plane solutions and seismic moment tensors used in this study. Table 3 shows the parameters of the solution of the focal mechanism of this earthquake (Dionicio et al., 2023); the corresponding “beach ball” diagrams are shown in Figure 3. According to the location and solution of the focal mechanism, this earthquake could be associated with the Servitá fault (see Figure 3 and Table 1). The Servitá Fault is a thrust, right-lateral strike-slip (Paris et al., 2000).
Table 3 shows that this earthquake corresponds to a large earthquake with a scalar seismic moment of exponential order 1018. The axes are oriented such that x - north, y - east, and z - toward the center of the Earth; the maximum component of the seismic moment tensor is horizontal in the east-west direction (component Myy).
Figure 4 shows the NW-SE cross-section of the aftershock areas in the first five days after the main event of May 24, 2008 (A) and August 17, 2023 (B) earthquakes. Figures 4, 8, 9, and 10 were generated using the ZMAP7 software (Wiemer, 2001; Swiss Seismological Service [SED]).
The 2008 earthquake and its aftershocks occurred west of the San Juanito fault, and the depth of its hypocenters was predominantly between 0 and 15 km; the aftershocks were not necessarily oriented toward the fault trace. While the 2023 earthquake and its aftershock sequence are located to the east of the 2008 process, and the depth of their hypocenters is primarily between 10 and 20 km, in this case, the aftershocks are associated and oriented with the trace of the Servitá fault.
The focal mechanisms for the 2008 earthquake with a rake angle λ 179º (Ekström et al., 2012) and the 2023 earthquake with a rake angle λ 150º (Table 3), both with b-value < 1.0, respond to a thrust fault (Schorlemmer et al., 2005; Petruccelli et al., 2018, 2019), and for the first five days, aftershocks b-values for 2008 earthquake (0.65 ± 0.14), and 2023 earthquake (0.55 ± 0.03) fully confirm this type of fault for these earthquakes.
3. Method
The present study conducts a complementary analysis of macroseismic and instrumental information from the earthquake that occurred on August 17, 2023, in Colombian territory.
3.1. ANALYSIS OF MACROSEISMIC INFORMATION
The analysis of macroseismic intensities of the August 17, 2023 earthquake that occurred in Colombian territory was conducted according to the European EMS-98 scale (Grünthal, 1998) for 423 locations (SGC, 2023a). Then, applying the calibrated macroseismic attenuation model for the Colombian Andean region (Gomez-Capera et al., 2020) and the Bakun and Wentworth method (Bakun and Wentworth, 1997), the macroseismic epicenter and equivalent magnitude (Mw) were determined. Following Gómez-Capera et al. (2022), a robust self-consistent correlation analysis was conducted between: (i) the spatial distribution of macroseismic intensities observed, (ii) the intensity attenuation model explicitly parameterized by the moment magnitude Mw derived from these same IDPs, and (iii) the epicentral distances measured exclusively from the computed macroseismic epicenter (Intensity Center [IC]). This integrated validation leverages the interdependence of Mw and IC as joint outputs of the IDP-based inversion, ensuring consistency of our results. Additionally, historical earthquakes with intensities above VI were analyzed to establish the recurrence interval of such earthquakes, considering the influence of various seismogenic tectonic structures associated with the epicentral zone of the earthquake under study.
3.2. ANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENTAL INFORMATION
Instrumental data reported by the National Seismological Network of Colombia (SGC, 2023a) are utilized to determine focal parameters and to establish the behavior of aftershocks generated by this main event. Currently, events reported by the RSNC are acquired and processed using SeisComp3 software and manually reviewed by seismology analysts of the SGC (SGC, 2023b). SeisComP3 is a seismological software for the acquisition, processing, distribution, and interactive data analysis developed by GFZ and GEMPA.
3.2.1. GEOMETRIC DIMENSION OF THE FOCUS
In seismically active regions worldwide, most large-magnitude earthquakes are typically preceded or followed by a cluster of smaller-magnitude seismic events that are closely related in time and space to the occurrence of the main earthquake, known as foreshocks and aftershocks, respectively (Udías and Mezcua, 2007). The initial classification of this group of earthquakes was introduced by Mogi (1963), who distinguished three types of earthquake occurrence sequences, which can occur depending on the geophysical characteristics surrounding the material structure and the distribution of tectonic stresses.
It has generally been observed that the frequency of aftershocks rapidly decreases over time, while their spatial distribution is often used to infer the area of the fault responsible for the main earthquake (Lay and Wallace, 1995). In most seismic events, it is noted that the fault area (or rupture area) increases with the magnitude of the main earthquake; thus, Utsu and Seki (1954) developed an empirical relationship to determine the rupture area during a specific earthquake, expressed as follows (Lay and Wallace, 1995).
Where A represents the rupture area, measured in cm2 , and Ms is the magnitude of the surface waves. However, it should be noted that the rupture area caused by the main earthquake, determined by the early hours of the seismic sequence, is not necessarily equal to the area determined by its extent, which is associated with the total distribution of aftershocks. The approximate time of the aftershock sequence to estimate the rupture length varies for each earthquake. For example, Christophersen and Smith (2000) defined a time window for the aftershocks of each event that extended 30 days after the occurrence of an aftershock greater than 5.0. Generally, the aftershock zone continuously expands as its occurrence time extends, so the fault area is considered to be determined by the extent of the zone occupied by the aftershocks occurring 1 or 2 days after the largest earthquake, a limit imposed because sometimes the aftershock zone continuously grows for a month or more, presumably implying the outward expansion of the rupture zone caused by the main earthquake (Lay and Wallace, 1995).
According to Wells and Coppersmith (1994), the rupture area of an earthquake, with magnitude moment in the range of 4.8 to 7.6, on a reverse fault, can be calculated by the following regression:
Where A is the rupture area measured in km2 , and Mw is known as moment magnitude. We use equations 1 and 2 to compare both methods involving the extent of the earthquake aftershock zone and the empirical regression obtained from historical data, respectively.
Several authors have proposed empirical relationships to determine the geometric dimensions of earthquake foci (Risnichenko, 1976; Shebalin, 1971, 1974). Particularly, Wells and Coppersmith (1994) propose that for earthquakes with a magnitude moment range of 5.4 to 7.4, the surface rupture length (L) for a reverse fault is given by the following regression:
Likewise, the reverse fault downdip rupture width (W) can be calculated from the following relationship (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994):
3.2.2. SEISMOTECTONIC DEFORMATION
Seismotectonic deformation in a region can be assessed based on the focal mechanism solutions of earthquakes, providing information about the fault plane and the geometric orientation of the seismic moment tensor. It determines the contribution of the seismic moment magnitude of the event to the tectonic deformation accumulating in the region. For this purpose, parameters such as the area of the seismogenic source, the summation of seismic moments of the population of events occurring within a considered time interval must be considered (Kostrov, 1974; Risnichenko, 1976; Risnichenko, 1985; Kostrov and Das, 1988). The corresponding mathematical expression is as follows:
Where εij̇ is the strain tensor, Ω is the volume deformed due to seismic activity, Mij are the components of the seismic moment tensor for all earthquakes occurring within this volume over time T in years, μ is the modulus of rigidity or viscosity of the medium depending on the seismotectonic environment, for the Earth’s crust is 3 x 1011 dynes/cm2 (Turcotte and Schubert, 2002; Stein and Wysession, 2009), and N is the number of earthquakes.
Thus, starting from the analysis of the focal mechanism and the seismic moment tensor, the seismotectonic deformation of the area is evaluated, including the geometric dimension of the seismic focus and the average elastic displacement.
To obtain the average strain rate on one of the deformed faces of the volume under study, we use the following expression (Guzmán-Speziale, 2001):
The equation 6 determines the strain rate (vij) on the face, which is normal to xi, where l1 , l2 , and l3 are the volume dimensions along these directions. In the usual right-handed coordinate system, the xi components are oriented similarly to the x, y, and z coordinates, such that x1 is oriented northward, x2 eastward, and x3 downward, being interpreted in the way that, for example, v2 is the relative velocity in the EW direction and between the faces in the NS direction (Guzmán-Speziale, 2001).
4. Results
The macroseismic intensity dataset used in this study was proposed by the Colombian Geological Survey (SGC, 2023a). This dataset is based on the European Macroseismic Scale EMS-98 (Grünthal, 1998) for 423 IDPs (Figure 5a). The distribution of IDPs ranges from 2 to 7 (EMS-98) and constitutes the input dataset for our subsequent analysis.
4.1. MACROSEISMIC INTENSITY ATTENUATION TREND WITH EPICENTRAL DISTANCE
The maximum observed macroseismic intensity (Imax) reached grade 7 EMS-98 (Figure 5b), affecting localities between 10 and 33 km from the instrumental epicenter (Figure 6). This macroseismic intensity level was associated with severe damage to older structures constructed over 50 years ago, particularly those with adobe structures, which resulted in significant damage such as extensive cracks and partial roof collapses. Minor damage was observed in 14 locations, ranging from 27 to 89 km from the epicenter, with a macroseismic intensity of 6 EMS-98. Macroseismic intensity 5 was reported in 147 locations at epicentral distances ranging from 17 to 397 km, while intensity 4 EMS-98 was observed in 168 municipalities (56 to 539 km). In more distant regions, with epicentral distances between 100 and 700 km, 3 and 2 intensities EMS-98 were documented in 46 and 45 locations, respectively (Figure 6).
This spatial distribution of macroseismic intensities shows a consistent attenuation with epicentral distance (Figure 6). The presence of a broad range of well-distributed IDPs, including both near and far‑field observations, confirms that the dataset is robust and well-suited for analytical modeling. In particular, the observed decay in macroseismic intensity with distance provides the necessary conditions to apply the intensity attenuation model calibrated in magnitude (Gómez-Capera et al., 2020) and to implement the Bakun and Wentworth (1997) method, which will be addressed in the following section.
4.2. MACROSEISMIC EPICENTER AND EQUIVALENT MAGNITUDE
For the estimation of the location and magnitude Mw of the macroseismic epicenter, 423 intensity points were used as input data, applying the intensity attenuation model calibrated in Mw for the Colombian Andean region by Gomez-Caperaetal.(2020; Figure6) and the Bakun and Wentworth method (1997; BW97 hereafter). The analysis yielded a macroseismic magnitude of Mw 6.3, with a 67% confidence interval of Mw=6.3±0.2. The location of the intensity center (4.465º and ‑73.540º) was determined within a 67% and 95% confidence range, covering an approximate radius of 60 km in the Eastern Andes and Llanos foothills. It was designated as the macroseismic epicenter (Figure 5b).
4.3. ANALYSIS OF THE AFTERSHOCK SEQUENCE
Before analyzing the aftershock sequence of the earthquake of August 17, 2023, reported by the RSNC, it is important to note the precision errors with the determination which this agency determines the main seismological parameters, i.e., epicenter coordinates (latitude and longitude), depth, and RMS (Figure 7). This last parameter, which represents the average residual error, measures how well the observed data fit the Earth velocity model used by the seismological network (Havskov and Ottemöller, 2010). According to information published by the Colombian National Seismological Network (RSNC), at least 90 aftershocks were in the first five days following the mainshock (2023-08-17 17:04:51). Station coverage and phase counts varied across events. For example, the first aftershock in that window (ML 4.6 at 2023-08-17 17:17:18) was located using 26 stations and 52 phases (26 P and 26 S), with an RMS travel-time residual of 0.8 s, an average horizontal location error of 1.95 km, and a depth error of 3.2 km, see Seismicity Catalog (SGC, 2023b).
Following the criteria for the quality of the solution of hypocentral parameters in a seismological network, established by Havskov and Ottemöller (2010), we can assess the quality of the data provided by the RSNC for the parameters of the main event and aftershocks of August 17, 2023, which are analyzed in Table 4.
As can be seen in Table 4, the error in the determination of latitude shows that 96.1% of the data of the replicates determined by RSNC are excellent or good quality, with errors in the range between 1 and 5 km (Figure 7a). For longitude, 85.6% of the data are of excellent or good quality, with errors ranging between 1 and 5 km (Figure 7b). In the case of depth, 73.06% of the data have excellent to good quality with errors not exceeding 5 km (Figure 7c), and finally, 49% of the data have an RMS < 0.50, showing excellent quality (Figure 7d).
Thus, we consider that the quality of the aftershock data of the August 17, 2023 earthquake provided by the RSNC is appropriate for the purpose of the present work; therefore, no additional reprocessing is required from us.
During the initial 20 hours following the main event, a series of aftershocks were recorded, comprising at least 100 earthquakes with magnitudes ranging from 0.5 to 5.6. Many of these aftershocks have magnitudes between 1.0 and 1.5, concentrated at depths shallower than 20 km. A cluster is observed between 10 and 20 km deep (Figures 8 and 9). According to the classification introduced by Mogi (1963), which distinguishes three types of earthquake sequences occurring after the occurrence of a strong earthquake, the aftershock sequence generated by the August 19, 2023, earthquake exhibits Type I regularity, a main event followed by several secondary earthquakes, whose magnitude and occurrence decrease over time (Udías and Mezcua, 1997). It indicates that the rocky materials near the epicentral zone behave uniformly, such that the release of accumulated tectonic stress over time did not occur instantaneously but rather occurred as a gradual process until surpassing the roughness, causing friction in the medium.
4.4. GUTENBERG‑RICHTER FREQUENCY LAW APPLIED TO AFTERSHOCKS
Figure 10 displays, on the one hand, the 3D distribution of aftershocks in-depth segregated by sequence days for the period between August 17th and 21st, 2023, and, on the other hand, the cumulative number of aftershocks alongside the Gutenberg-Richter frequency law graph (log N = a – bM), indicating a b-value = 0.55 (±0.03), obtained with a completeness magnitude of Mw = 1.0 (Figure 9C).
Although the absolute value of the parameter b remains a subject of considerable controversy in seismology, owing to differing assumptions regarding completeness magnitude or spatial and temporal windows, it has been demonstrated that its value is a consequence of the productivity scale of aftershocks concerning the magnitude of the main shock (Utsu, 1972), which can be associated with the stress level in the epicentral region (Kanamori and Anderson, 1975; Lay and Wallace, 1995).
Udías and Mezcua (1997) note that the b-value ranges between 0.6 and 1.5 and is related to the physical characteristics of the region, such that a high b-value implies a predominance of small-magnitude earthquakes, suggesting low resistance in the region, while a low value indicates a prevalence of larger-magnitude earthquakes, signaling greater resistance in the material. Generally, b-values are small, typically between 0.5 and 1.0 (Hao-Yu et al., 2017). Some authors suggest that a small b-value indicates high stress (Frohlich and Davis, 1993; Wiemer and Wyss, 1997; Wyss et al., 1998; Enescu and Ito, 2002; Wyss, 2004). Therefore, the b-value obtained in this analysis for the aftershock sequence is considered very low at 0.55; however, between March 1, 2018, and August 16, 2023, the area where this event occurred had Mc = 1.5 and b = 0.90, maintaining high levels of stress during this lapse in the epicentral zone over time.
4.4.1. GUTENBERG‑RICHTER FREQUENCY LAW APPLIED TO AFTERSHOCKS
Given that SGC (2023b) reported a main shock magnitude of Mw 6.1, and considering equation 1, the rupture area of the fault associated with this seismic event corresponds to A = 166.7 km2 .
Although the magnitude of the earthquake under study is reported in Mw, this equation is used since it is assumed to be equivalent to Ms. Previous studies show that within the range of 5.0 to 7.5, these magnitudes are approximately equal (Kanamori, 1983). Wells and Coppersmith (1994) show no systematic difference between Ms and Mw in the range of 5.7 to 8.0. For Colombian territory, equivalence is established between Ms and Mw magnitudes between 3.6 and 6.1 (Servicio Geológico Colombiano & Earthquake Model Foundation [SGC-GEM], 2018).
However, using the equation 2 proposed by Wells and Coppersmith (1994), it is obtained that the rupture area for the earthquake under study is 97.3 km2 . Since this value is consistent with historical measurements, as shown in Figure 11, we will use it for our subsequent calculations. This Figure shows a comparative rupture area of the 2008 Quetame (5.9 Mw) earthquake in the same study area. As a regional benchmark, we compare with the 2019 Mesetas earthquake sequence (Mw 6.0 and 5.8 within 16 min) on the Algeciras Fault System, characterized by dextral–transpressive faulting and a compact aftershock distribution (Poveda et al., 2022). This analogue supports that our Mw and rupture area estimate for the 2023 event is consistent with reverse/oblique ruptures in the Eastern Cordillera.
The parameters determining the geometric dimension of the seismic focus of the event on August 17, 2023 (Table 5), are evaluated using equations 2, 3, and 4.
4.5. SEISMOTECTONIC DEFORMATION IN THE FOCAL REGION CAUSED BY THE MAIN EVENT
The seismotectonic deformation generated in the focal region during the earthquake occurrence is determined by considering the concept of specific seismic potential in a seismoactive volume (Kostrov, 1974), which corresponds to the dislocation rate during the earthquake, calculated considering the scalar seismic moment, for which equation 5 is used, Mij according to Table 3, can be written as:
As mentioned above, the maximum stress component is in the east-west direction (component Myy); therefore, this component is taken to determine the associated seismotectonic deformation as follows:
Using the values mentioned above, it is obtained that:
Therefore, the corresponding mean deformation rate of the volume is determined as (Guzmán-Speziale, 2001):
Thus,
This result shows that both historical earthquakes, at least the most recent one in the area on May 24, 2008, and modern ones, e.g., August 17, 2023, yield an average compression rate of 11.7 mm/yr along the Servitá fault, while the relative motion between the Nazca and South American plates expressed along the Andean Block is 53 mm/yr with azimuth of 85° (Mora-Páez and Audemard, 2021). It suggests that the part of the seismic deformation related to the plate boundary is absorbed as compression along the North Andean Block, which plays the role of a compressional stress transmission structure for the Borde Llanero fault system, mainly the Servitá fault.
5. Discussion
The complementary analysis of macroseismic and instrumental information about a given earthquake represents an appropriate approach for improving the knowledge of the characteristics of historical and recent earthquakes (Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 2021a). In the present study, using the macroseismic information gathered by the Unidad Nacional de Gestion del Riesgo de Disasters (UNGRD - National Unit for Disasters Risk Management, a public entity in charge of directing, guiding and coordinating the actions of disaster risk management in Colombia) and instrumental information reported by the Geological Survey of Colombia (SGC, 2023b), the earthquake that occurred on August 17, 2023 in the central region of Colombia is analyzed. The central geographic region of Colombia has a long seismic history. Since 1644, there has been evidence of strong earthquakes that have caused economic and material losses in several departments (Table 2 and Figure 2).
Figure 12 shows the temporal distribution of the main historical and recent earthquakes in this region, including the last one analyzed in this study, which gave rise to intensities VII or larger. This set of earthquakes is shown in Figure 2, and the original locations are summarized in Table 2. The importance of these events is that they have caused significant intensities in Bogotá and damage in other surrounding municipalities. They gave rise to intensities VII or larger in the zone.
Historical seismicity of Colombia shows earthquakes located in the central region (Figures 2, 12 and Table 2), i.e., Honda (Tolima), 1805, I o = IX; Colombia (Huila), 1967, Io = X and Tauramena (Casanare), 1995, I o = VIII and others, that although not necessarily located near the epicenter of the earthquake of August 17, 2023, in this zone the intensities are at least VII (Ramírez, 1975; Espinosa, 2004; Sarabia and Cifuentes, 2007; Salcedo-Hurtado and Castaño-Castaño, 2011; Salcedo-Hurtado and Gómez-Capera, 2013; Gómez-Capera et al., 2014; Mora-Páez et al., 2015; Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 2021a).
This series of events is caused by the action of the Nazca plate that moves in a W-E general direction towards the South American continent, causing a strong compression in the suture zone of the piedmont of the Eastern Cordillera through the Andean Block (Salcedo-Hurtado et al., 1995), being the earthquakes of May 24, 2008, and August 17, 2023, the most representative ones that have recently occurred. Generally, these seismic events have left considerable damage to the national economy, including diverse effects on the infrastructure of one of the main road arteries of the country, which connects the territory of the Eastern Plains of Colombia with the capital of the republic.
In this study, we use the solution of the focal mechanism of the earthquake of August 17, 2023, proposed by the RSNC (Dionicio et al., 2023), to determine, on the one hand, the dimensions of the focus and, on the other hand, the average velocity of seismotectonic deformation that could have occurred with its occurrence.
Based on the solution of the focal mechanism of the main event and the distribution of the aftershocks, we propose that this earthquake was caused by the thrust/right-lateral strike-slip Servitá fault, belonging to the fault system of the eastern edge of the Eastern Cordillera in central Colombia. This fault is a thrust, right-lateral strike-slip (Paris et al., 2000).
This analysis concludes that the application of the Mw-calibrated intensity attenuation model (Figure 6) and the BW97 method accurately models the location and magnitude of the August 17, 2023 earthquake from macroseismic data (SGC, 2023a) within an acceptable margin of uncertainty, both for magnitude (Mw±0.2) and for location (±13 km; distance between the star and black triangle in Figure 5b). This complementary approach between macroseismic observations, Mw-calibrated macroseismic intensity attenuation models, and seismic instrumental parameters allows the validation of such models.
These results are significant because they validate the application of the Mw-calibrated intensity attenuation model (Gomez-Capera et al., 2020) and the BW97 method in the Andean region of Colombia. Despite the partial distribution of IDPs, with a gap in the Orinoquia plains, the analysis shows that the instrumental Mw was reproduced within the uncertainty range of ±0.2, confirming the model’s reliability. It improves confidence in using macroseismic data to estimate seismic parameters and provides a valuable tool for regions with limited instrumental coverage and historical earthquakes. The consistency between macroseismic observations and the Mw-calibrated intensity model strengthens its applicability in future seismic studies in similar geological settings
The average compression rate obtained in this study—11.7 mm/yr, derived from the focal-mechanism analysis of the 17 August 2023 earthquake—is consistent with the geodetic slip rate of ~7 mm/yr reported by Jarrin et al. (2023) for the eastern margin of the Eastern Cordillera relative to the South American plate at the latitude of the epicentral area.
6. Conclusions
The earthquake on August 17, 2023, in the central region of Colombian territory, is part of the historical seismic sequence of the zone, with an intensity higher than VII EMS-98, causing considerable material damage in several municipalities in the area.
The location of the epicenter, the analysis of the aftershock sequence, and the focal mechanism attribute this event to the Servitá fault, which, according to the literature, corresponds to a thrust/right-lateral strike-slip.
The application of the attenuation model calibrated in magnitude Mw and the BW97 method allows for precise modeling of the location and magnitude of the August 17, 2023, earthquake from macroseismic data within an acceptable margin of uncertainty for both magnitudes (Mw±0.2) and location (±13 km).
Using valid empirical regressions in the literature, we determine the parameters of the seismic focus size, obtaining that horizontal extension L= 9.62 km, vertical extension l z = 15.76 km, rupture area A = 97.3 km2 , and deformed volume V = 1533.45 km3 . With these parameters and applying Kostrov’s model to the seismic flow of the rock mass, it was found that the maximum compressional strain rate is ε̇yy = 1.22x10-6 yr-1 , which is produced at an average velocity of 11.7 , in the E-W direction. This result suggests that the part of the seismic deformation related to the plate boundary between Nazca and South America is absorbed as compression along the Andean Block, which plays the role of a compressional stress transmission structure for the Borde Llanero fault system, especially the Servitá fault.
Data availability
The data used in this study are all parts of published articles and sources referred to instrumental and macroseismic data (SGC, 2023a; SGC, 2023b) throughout the manuscript: https://www.sgc.gov.co/sismos https://sish.sgc.gov.co Likewise, the data of the focal mechanism have been taken from the Colombian Geological Service (SGC, 2023b): http://bdrsnc.sgc.gov.co/sismologia1/sismologia/focal_seiscomp_ 3/swift_sol. php?id_sismo=SGC2023qdvnvf&anio=2023
Contributions of authors
(1) Conceptualization: EJSH, AAGC, CAVJ, GCM, JMV; (2) Data analysis or acquisition: EJSH, AAGC, GCM; (3) Methodological development: EJSH, AAGC, CAVJ, GCM; (4) Drafting of the original manuscript: EJSH, AAGC, CAVJ, GCM, HMP, JMV; (5) Drafting of the revised and edited manuscript: EJSH, AAGC, GCM, HMP, JMV; (6)Graphic design: AAGC, GCM; (7) Interpretation: EJSH, AAGC, CAVJ, GCM, HMP, JMV.
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the Vice-Rectorate for Research at Universidad del Valle (Cali, Colombia) for funding this project (CI-4446). We also thank Universidad Santo Tomás (Villavicencio), Universidad Nacional de Colombia (Bogotá), the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia—Sezione di Milano (Milan, Italy), and Universidad de Manizales (Manizales, Colombia) for institutional support. We are grateful to the Geological Survey of Colombia for providing seismic and geodetic information. CAV acknowledges MINCIENCIAS’s funding for grant project 80740-182-2021 and the Universidad Nacional de Colombia through projects Hermes 51307, 51929, 54189, 57879, and 58331. We finally thank Dr. Carlos E. Reinoza-Gómez and one anonymous reviewer for their remarks that helped to improve the manuscript.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Handling editor
Raúl Castro Escamilla.
References
Bakun, W. H., & Wentworth, C. M. (1997). Estimating earthquake location and magnitude from seismic intensity data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 87(6), 1502–1521. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0870061502
Chicangana, G., Bocanegra, A., Pardo, J., Salcedo, E., Gómez, A., & Vargas, C. A. (2022). Sismicidad y sismotectónica para el sector norte del ámbito del sistema de fallas de Algeciras, Cordillera Oriental, Colombia. Boletín de Geología, 44(1), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.18273/revbol.v44n1-2022005
Chicangana, G., Vargas, C. A. (2013). The subduction geometry change under Colombia and orogenic evolution of the northern Andes in late Neogene times. Acta Geologica Sinica, 87(Suppl.), 116–118. http://www.geojournals.cn/dzxben/ch/index.aspx
Chicangana, G., Vargas, C. A., & Caneva, A. (2013). El posible escenario de un sismo de magnitud ≥ 6.5 para la ciudad de Villavicencio (Colombia). Cuadernos de Geografía: Revista Colombiana de Geografía, 22(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcdg.v22n2.30166
Christophersen, A., & Smith, E. (2000). A global model for aftershock behavior [Conference]. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand. https://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/0379.pdf
Di Giacomo, D., & Sarabia, A. M. (2021). Use of macroseismic and instrumental data to reassess earthquake locations: Examples from pre-digital earthquakes in Colombia. Journal of South American Earth Sciences, 111, Article 103467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2021.103467
Dimaté, C., Rivera, L., & Cisternas, A. (2005). Re-visiting large historical earthquakes in the Colombian Eastern Cordillera. Journal of Seismology, 9, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10950-005-1413-2
Dionicio, V., Pedraza, P., & Poveda, E. (2023). Moment tensor and focal mechanism data of earthquakes recorded by Servicio Geológico Colombiano from 2014 to 2021. Boletín Geológico, 50(2). https://doi.org/10.32685/0120-1425/bol.geol.50.2.2023.694
Ekström, G., Nettles, M., & Dziewonski, A. M. (2012). The global CMT project 2004–2010: Centroid-moment tensors for 13,017 earthquakes. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 200–201, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2012.04.002
Enescu, B., & Ito, K. (2002). Spatial analysis of the frequency-magnitude distribution and decay rate of aftershock activity of the 2000 Western Tottori earthquake. Earth, Planets and Space, 54, 847–859. https://doi.org/10.1186/BF03352077
Espinosa, A. (2004). Historia sísmica de Bogotá [Presentation]. Martes del Planetario. Sociedad Geográfica de Colombia.
Frohlich, C., & Davis, S. D. (1993). Teleseismic b values; or, much ado about 1.0. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 98(B1), 631– 644. https://doi.org/10.1029/92JB01891
Gomez-Capera, A. A., Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., Bindi, D., Choy, J. E., & Garcia-Pelaez, J. A. (2014). Localización y magnitud del sismo de 1785 en Colombia calculadas a partir de intensidades macrosísmicas. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales, 38(147), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.18257/raccefyn.63
Gomez-Capera, A. A., Salcedo-Hurtado, E. J., Santulin, M., Rios, L. F., & Blandon, J. C. (2022). Estimating magnitude and location from macroseismic data of the 1925 Colombian earthquake. Bulletin of Geophysics and Oceanography, 63(3), 377–402. https://doi.org/10.4430/bgo00386
Gómez-Capera, A. A., Stucchi, M., Arcila, M., Bufaliza, M., Choy, J., Leyton, L., Pirchiner, M., Rendon, H., Rodriguez Valverde, L., Sarabia, A. M., Tavera, H., & Yepes, H. (2020). Catálogo de terremotos de América del Sur homogéneo en Mw para el periodo pre-1964. GEOS, 40(2). https://geos.cicese.mx/index.php/geos/article/view/58
Gómez, J., & Montes, N. E. (Comp.). (2020). Atlas geológico de Colombia 2020. Servicio Geológico Colombiano.
Gómez-Hurtado, E., Aguirre-Hoyos, L. M., Diederix, H., Audemard, M. F. A., MoraPáez, H., Bohórquez-Orozco, O., Muñoz, O., González, D., López-Isaza, J. A., Escobar-Rey, L. K., Martínez-Díaz, G. P., Ramírez-Cadena, J., Idárraga-García, J., López-Herrera, N. R., Barragán, W., Tique, Y., Fonseca, H., Jiménez, J., & Plazas-Ruiz, J. (2022). Neotectónica y paleosismología de la falla de Algeciras, Huila, Colombia. Servicio Geológico Colombiano y Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia. (Publicaciones Geológicas Especiales, Vol. 44). https://doi.org/10.32685/9789585399389
Grünthal, G. (Ed.). (1998). European macroseismic scale 1998. Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Séismologie. https://www.franceseisme.fr/EMS98_Original_english.pdf
Guzmán-Speziale, M. (2001). Active seismic deformation in the grabens of northern Central America and its relationship to the relative motion of the North AmericaCaribbean plate boundary. Tectonophysics, 337(1-2), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1951(01)00110-X
Hao-Yu, W. U., Hong-Fu, L. I. U., Wei-Jin, X. U., & Xia, W. A. N. G. (2017). Fractal dimension and b-value of the aftershock sequence of the 2008 MS 8.0 Wenchuan earthquake. Natural Hazards, 88, 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2866-7
Havskov, J., & Ottemoller, L. (2010). Routine data processing in earthquake seismology: With sample data, exercises and software. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8697-6
INGEOMINAS. (2008). El sismo de Quetame del 24 de mayo de 2008. Aspectos sismológicos y evaluación preliminar de daños [Informe preliminar No. 2]. Instituto Colombiano de Geología y Minería, Subdirección de Amenazas Geológicas y Entorno Ambiental. https://www2.sgc.gov.co/Publicaciones/Sismos%20importantes/Informe%20Sismo%20Quetame%2024%20de%20mayo%20de%202008.pdf
International Seismological Centre (ISC). (2025). ISC-EHB dataset. https://doi.org/10.31905/PY08W6S3
International Seismological Centre & Global Earthquake Model Foundation (GEM). (2025). The ISC-GEM Global Instrumental Earthquake Catalogue, Version 12.1. https://doi.org/10.31905/d808b825
Jarrin, P., Nocquet, J.-M., Rolandone, F., Mora-Páez, H., Mothes, P., & Cisneros, D. (2023). Current motion and deformation of the Nazca Plate: New constraints from GPS measurements. Geophysical Journal International, 232(2), 842–863. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggac353
Kanamori, H. (1983). Magnitude scale and quantification of earthquakes. Tectonophysics, 93(3–4), 185–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(83)90273-1
Kanamori, H., & Anderson, D. L. (1975). Theoretical basis of some empirical relations in seismology. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 65(5), 1073–1095. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0650051073
Kostrov, B. (1974). Mechanics of tectonic earthquake foci. Nauka.
Kostrov, B., & Das, S. (1988). Principles of earthquake source mechanics. Cambridge University Press.
Lagardere, C., & Vargas, C. A. (2021). Earthquake distribution and lithospheric rheology beneath the Northwestern Andes, Colombia. Geodesy and Geodynamics, 12(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2020.12.002
Lay, T., & Wallace, T. C. (1995). Modern global seismology. Academic Press.
Mogi, K. (1963). Some discussions on aftershocks, foreshocks and earthquake swarms: The fracture of a semi finite body caused by an inner stress origin and its relation to the earthquake phenomena (Third Paper). Bulletin of the Earthquake Research Institute, 41, 615–658. https://doi.org/10.15083/0000033716
Monsalve, J. H. (1998). Geometría de la subducción de la Placa Nazca en el noroeste de Colombia: Implicaciones tectónicas y sísmicas [Master’s thesis]. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://tesiunamdocumentos.dgb.unam.mx/pdbis/264488/Index.html
Mora, A. (2007). Inversion tectonics and exhumation processes in the Eastern Cordillera of Colombia [Doctoral Thesis]. Universität Potsdam. https://www.academia.edu/10251572/Inversion_tectonics_and_exhumation_processes_in_the_Eastern_Cordillera_of_Colombia
Mora-Páez, H. (2020). Crustal movements in Colombia based on GPS space geodesy with the GeoRED network [Doctoral Thesis]. University of Nagoya. http://hdl.handle.net/2237/00031994
Mora-Páez, H., & Audemard, F. (2021). GNSS networks for geodynamics in the Caribbean, Northwestern South America, and Central America. In Erol & S. Erol (Eds.), Geodetic sciences: Theory, applications and recent developments. Intechopen Book Series. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97215
Mora-Páez, H., Kellogg, J. N., Freymueller, J. T., Mencin, D., Fernandes, R. M. S., Diederix, H., LaFemina, P., Cardona-Piedrahita, L., Lizarazo, S., Pelaez-Gaviria, J. M., DiazMila, F., Bohorquez-Orozco, O., GiraldoLondoño, O., & Corchuelo-Cuervo, Y. (2019). Crustal deformation in the northern Andes: A new GPS velocity field. Journal of South American Earth Sciences, 89, 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2018.11.002
Mora-Páez, H., López, S. A., Acero, N., Ramírez Cadena, J., Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., & Trenkamp, R. (2015). Análisis geodésico y deformación sismotectónica asociada al sismo de Quetame, Colombia, 24 de mayo de 2008. Boletín Geológico, (43), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.32685/0120-1425/ boletingeo.43.2015.26
Mora-Páez, H., Mencin, D. J., Molnar, P., Diederix, D., Cardona-Piedrahita, L., Peláez-Gaviria, J. R., & Corchuelo-Cuervo, Y. (2016). GPS velocities and the construction of the Eastern Cordillera of the Colombian Andes. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(16), 8407–8416. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL069795
Nakano, M., Kumagai, H., & Inoue, H. (2008). Waveform inversion in the frequency domain for the simultaneous determination of earthquake source mechanism and moment function. Geophysical Journal International, 173(3), 1000–1011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2008.03783.x
París, G., Machette, M. N., Dart, R. L., & Haller, K. M. (2000). Map and Database of Quaternary Faults and Folds in Colombia and its Offshore Regions [Report, 00-0284]. U.S. Geological Survey. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/ofr-00-0284/
Pennington, W. D. (1981). Subduction of the eastern Panama Basin and seismotectonics of northwestern South America. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 86(B11), 10753–10770. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB086iB11p10753
Pérez, M. (August 18, 2023). Cierre de la vía al Llano por deslizamientos por temblor. Radio Nacional de Colombia - RTVC.
Petruccelli, A., Gasperini, P., Tormann, T., Schorlemmer, D., Rinaldi, A. P., Vannucci, G., & Wiemer, S. (2019). Simultaneous dependence of the earthquake‐size distribution on faulting style and depth. Geophysical Research Letters, 46(20), 11,044–11,053. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083997
Petruccelli, A., Vannucci, G., Lolli, B., & Gasperini, P. (2018). Harmonic fluctuation of the slope of the frequency–magnitude distribution (b‐value) as a function of the angle of rake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 108(4), 1864–1876. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120170328
Poveda, E., Pedraza, P., Velandia, F., Mayorga, E., Plicka, V., Gallovič, F., & Zahradník, J. (2022). 2019 Mw 6.0 Mesetas (Colombia) earthquake sequence: Insights from integrating seismic and morphostructural observations. Earth and Space Science, 9(12), Article e2022EA002465. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022EA002465
Ramírez, J. E. (1975). Historia de los terremotos en Colombia. Instituto Geográfico Agustín Codazzi. https://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co:8443/handle/20.500.11762/19778
Risnichenko, Y. V. (1976). El foco extendido y flujo sismotectónico de las masas de rocas. In Investigaciones sobre la física de los terremotos (pp. 236–262). Nauka, Moscú.
Risnichenko, Yu. V. (1985). Problemas de la sismología. Obras escogidas. Nauka, Moscú.
Salazar, J. M., & Vargas, C. A. (2015). Fractal dimension and seismotectonic deformation rates along an inter-plate setting: Seismic regime along the Caribbean plate boundary zone. In C. Bartolini & P. Mann (Eds.), AAPG memoir 108, Petroleum geology and potential of the Colombian Caribbean margin. https://doi.org/10.1306/13531940M1083644
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., Gomez-Capera, A. A., & Mora-Páez, H. (2021a). Análisis complementario entre parámetros instrumentales y macrosísmicos: Terremoto de mayo 24, 2008 en Quetame, Colombia. Boletín de Geología, 43(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.18273/revbol.v43n2-2021009
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., Audemard, F. A., & García-Millán, N. (2021b). Parámetros focales del terremoto del 28 de abril de 1894 en los Andes venezolanos usando datos macrosísmicos. Revista Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales, 45(175), 591–606. https://doi.org/10.18257/raccefyn.1195
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., Blandón-Silva, J. C., & Ríos-García, L. (2021c). Reevaluación de intensidades macrosísmicas del terremoto del 07 de junio de 1925 en Colombia. Boletín de Geología, 43(3), 35–61. https://doi.org/10.18273/revbol.v43n3-2021002
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., & Castaño Castaño, A. N. (2011). Reevaluación macrosísmica del terremoto del 12 de julio de 1785 en Colombia. Boletín de Geología, 33(2), 15–32. https://revistas.uis.edu.co/index.php/revistaboletindegeologia/article/view/2542
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., & Gomez-Capera, A. A. (2013). Estudio macrosísmico del terremoto del 18 de octubre de 1743 en la región central de Colombia. Boletín de Geología, 35(1), 109–128. https://revistas.uis.edu.co/index.php/revistaboletindegeologia/ article/view/3230
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., Gomez-Capera, A. A., & Rivera-Pérez, C. I. (1995). Deformación y desplazamientos de bloques corticales en la zona de falla del borde llanero, mediante datos sobre mecanismos focales de terremotos. In Memorias del seminario de sismotectónica del borde llanero colombiano. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2947.5208
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., Hernández-Obregón, M., & García-Millán, N. (2023). Parámetros del terremoto del 04 febrero de 1938 en la región del Eje Cafetero-Colombia a partir de datos macrosísmicos. Geofísica Internacional, 62(3), 525–542. https://doi.org/10.22201/igeof.2954436xe.2023.62.3.1715
Salcedo-Hurtado, E. de J., Rivera, C. I., & Gomez-Capera, A. A. (1997). Análisis de frecuencia de terremotos fuertes en la región central de Colombia mediante parámetros del régimen sísmico. Revista Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales, 21(79), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.18257/raccefyn.21(79).1997.2956
Sarabia-Gomez, A. M. (2016). Relación de atenuación de la intensidad sísmica para sismos corticales en Colombia. Método Bakun & Wentworth [Report]. Servicio Geológico Colombiano. https://miig.sgc.gov.co
Sarabia, A. M., & Cifuentes, H. G. (2007). Estudio macrosísmico del terremoto del 18 de octubre de 1743, Fómeque (Cundinamarca). INGEOMINAS.
Sarabia, A. M., & Cifuentes, H. G. (2009). Análisis macrosísmico del terremoto del 24 de mayo de 2008 en Quetame [Report]. INGEOMINAS.
Sarabia Gómez, A. M., Cifuentes Avendaño, H. G., & Robertson, K. (2010). Análisis histórico de los sismos ocurridos en 1785 y en 1917 en el centro de Colombia. Cuadernos de Geografía: Revista Colombiana de Geografía, (19), 153–162. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcdg.n19.16863
Schorlemmer, D., Wiemer, S., & Wyss, M. (2005). Variations in earthquake-size distribution across different stress regimes. Nature, 437, 539–542. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04094
Servicio Geológico Colombiano (SGC). (2023a). Evento sísmico: Boletín actualizado. http://bdrsnc.sgc.gov.co/sismologia1/sismologia/focal_seiscomp_3/swift_sol.php?anio=2023andid_sismo=SGC2023qdvnvf(Accessed April 2024).
Servicio Geológico Colombiano (SGC). (2023b). Catálogo de sismicidad. Catálogo sísmico. https://bdrsnc.sgc.gov.co/paginas1/catalogo/ (Accessed September 2025).
Servicio Geológico Colombiano (SGC). (2025a). Sismicidad histórica de Colombia. https://sish. sgc.gov.co/visor/ (Accessed April 2025). Servicio Geológico Colombiano (SGC). (2025b). Catálogo de sismicidad [Database]. https://bdrsnc.sgc.gov.co/paginas1/catalogo/index.php (Accessed October 2025)
Servicio Geológico Colombiano & Global Earthquake Model Foundation. (2018). Modelo nacional de amenaza sísmica de Colombia.
Servicio Geológico Colombiano–Grupo de Amenaza Sísmica. https://www2.sgc.gov.co/Noticias/Paginas/Modelo-nacional-de-amenazasismica-para-Colombia.aspx
Shebalin, N. V. (1971). Cálculo de las dimensiones y posición del foco del terremoto de Tashkien mediante datos macrosísmicos e instrumentales. In El terremoto de Tashkien de 1966 (pp. 68–79). Academia de Ciencias de la URSS.
Shebalin, N. V. (1974). Focos de terremotos fuertes en el territorio de la URSS. Nauka. [In Russian].
Stein, S., & Wysession, M. (2009). An introduction to seismology, earthquakes, and Earth structure. Wiley-Blackwell.
Swiss Seismological Service. (n.d.). Software ZMAP. http://www.seismo.ethz.ch/en/researchand-teaching/products-software/software/ZMAP
Turcotte, D. L., & Schubert, G. (2002). Geodynamics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807442
Udías, A., & Mezcua, J. (1997). Fundamentos de geofísica. Alianza.
Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres. (2023, 18 de agosto). UNGRD actualiza reportes de afectación por sismos presentados en el centro del país. https://portal.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/Paginas/Noticias/2023/UNGRD-actualizareportes-de-afectacion-por-sismospresentados-en-el-centro-del-pais.aspx
U.S. Geological Survey. (n. d.). Search Earthquake Catalog. [Database] https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/
Utsu, T. (1972). Aftershocks and earthquake statistics (3): Analyses of the distribution of earthquakes in magnitude, time, and space with special consideration to clustering characteristics of earthquake occurrence (1). Journal of the Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University. Series 7. Geophysics, 3(5), 379–441. http://hdl.handle.net/2115/8688
Utsu, T., & Seki, A. (1954). A relation between the area of aftershock region and the energy of mainshock. Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan, 24, 233–240. https://doi.org/10.4294/zisin1948.7.4_233
Vargas, C. A. (2020). Subduction geometries in northwestern South America. In J. Gómez & A. O. Pinilla-Pachon (Eds.), The geology of Colombia, Volume 4 Quaternary. Servicio Geológico Colombiano. (Publicaciones Geológicas Especiales 38). https://doi.org/10.32685/pub.esp.38.2019.11
Vargas, C. A., & Durán, J. P. (2005). State of strain and stress in Northwestern of South America. Earth Sciences Research Journal, 9(1), 41–49. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?pid=S1794-61902005000100005&script=sci_ arttext&tlng=en
Vargas, C. A., Gutiérrez, G., & Sarmiento, G. (2020). Subduction of an extinct rift and its role in the formation of submarine landslides in NW South America. In A. Georgiopoulou, L. A. Amy, S. Benetti, J. D. Chaytor, M. A. Clare, D. Gamboa, P. D. W. Haughton, J. Moernaut, & J. J. Mountjoy (Eds.), Subaqueous mass movements and their consequences: Advances in process understanding, monitoring and hazard assessments. Geological Society. (London, Special Publications, 500). https://doi.org/10.1144/SP500-2019-189
Vargas, C. A., Kammer, A., Valdes, M., Rodriguez, C. E., Caneva, A., Sánchez, J., Arias, E., Cortes, C. A., & Mora, H. (2005). New geological and geophysical contributions in the section Ibagué - Armenia, Central Cordillera - Colombia. Earth Sciences Research Journal, 9(2), 99–109. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1794-61902005000200003&lng=e&nrm= iso
Vargas, C. A., & Mann, P. (2013). Tearing and breaking off of subducted slabs as the result of collision of the Panama arc-indenter with Northwestern South America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103(3), 2025– 2046. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120328
Velandia, F., Acosta, J., Terraza, R., & Villegas, H. (2005). The current tectonic motion of the northern Andes along the Algeciras fault system in SW Colombia. Tectonophysics, 399(1–4), 313–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2004.12.028
Wells, D. L., & Coppersmith, K. J. (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(4), 974–1002. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0840040974
Wiemer, S. (2001). A software package to analyze seismicity: ZMAP. Seismological Research Letters, 72(3), 373–382. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.72.3.373
Wiemer, S., & Wyss, M. (1997). Mapping the frequency-magnitude distribution in asperities: An improved technique to calculate recurrence times? Journal of Geophysical Research, 102(B7), 15115–15128. https://doi.org/10.1029/97JB00726
Wyss, M. (2004). Fractal dimension and b-value on creeping and locked patches of the San Andreas Fault near Parkfield, California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 94(2), 410–421. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120030054
Wyss, M., McNutt, S. R., & Wyss, M. (1998). Temporal and three-dimensional spatial analyses of the frequency– magnitude distribution near Long Valley Caldera, California. Geophysical Journal International, 134(2), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246x.1998.00561.x
Peer Reviewing under the responsibility of Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)